What if stat budget of 8k? - Really? That's your argument? Obviously with different stat pools comes different math. Because with different stat pools BW/EA are going to change the DR values (Crit is a perfect example of this).

When 2.0 dropped, a reasonable stat budget was 2k. Now a reasonable stat budget is 4k. The DR values have not changed since then, only the level (55 to 60).

My argument was simply showing how arbitrary the "25%, no more" claim is. I mean, if you have some extremely specific justification for this (e.g. there's this one attack on this one boss that I want to dodge exactly 1 out of 4 times), then I respect that. Just saying "I don't feel like going higher is beneficial" is insufficient.

You also fail to see the logic behind what is being shown. The point I am trying to make is that is it not about what tank you are currently playing, you should be able to achieve the same amount of survivability, before factoring in cooldowns, based on your stats alone.

I would love it if that were the case. It's not though. Powertechs take more damage than the other two tanks, even before factoring in cooldowns. Part of this is damage type (e.g. Revan absolutely murders PTs in the DtPS department), and part of it is simple class balance. Heck, Juggernauts are hilariously OP for any fight where the pre-mitigation DtPS is particularly low (e.g. off-tanking Underlurker) and will take significantly less DtPS than the other two tanks, due to the non-scaling nature of Sonic Barrier.

Tank balance is an approximation. A very, very close approximation, but an approximation nonetheless. Even above and beyond this, you can see very dramatic differences from fight to fight. Properly itemized Juggs are going to take less damage on Bulo than any other tank by a fairly wide margin, even completely discounting cooldowns. Powertechs will take the least on Torque, again discounting cooldowns. Properly itemized assassins are going to take the least damage on most fights, but it will be particularly noticeable on fights like Revan (so basically, Revan).

The goal should be optimize for the tank you have, rather than trying to set up the mean mitigation such that it's perfectly equivalent on every fight (since you can't get there!).

And unless I am reading the rest of it wrong (based on your use of 'intrinsic bonuses' and 'better'), I completely disagree with you. Let's take the PT - in your discipline you have bonuses that give you 4% Absorb, 4% Defense. and 2% Shield. You also have Heat Screens, Heat Blast, and Shield Enhancers - these are all flat percentages and none of them care how much of that stat you currently have, they will give you only the flat percentage listed. Could I go up on Shield/Absorb on my PT? yeah, but I could also defend 5% more of the time (on applicable fights). Given the shear amount of up-time I have on Heat Blast's 25% buff I feel my points are better spent elsewhere. Juggernauts stacking Defense - ok, cool, you can hit 30% (ish) with your buffs, but your Shield/Absorb ratings are going to get you annihilated in fights that have very little to defend.

This isn't really a matter of opinion that either of us can "agree" or "disagree" on. We're talking about objective math here. Exact formulae:

1 - (1 - (0.1 + p)) (1 - 0.3) < 1 - (1 - 0.1) (1 - (0.3 + p))

It's pretty trivial to algebraically show that this inequality holds for all p > 0. What is being empirically demonstrated by the above is that a larger intrinsic bonus (e.g. PTs have more intrinsic shield/absorb than defense; Juggs are the inverse) implies that you are better off statting even more into that stat bucket.

You're very welcome to disagree that DtPS is the best thing to optimize for. Heck, even I disagree on that point, despite the fact that my somewhat boldly titled "ideal tank stats" optimizes for precisely and only DtPS. However, disagreeing on algebra itself isn't really an option. What you are claiming when you say that the points are "better spent elsewhere" is that you believe the above inequality does not hold, and this is an objectively false belief.

tl;dr: Additive bonuses are awesome (for tanks) and must be leveraged by any optimization methodology. Ignoring them in favor of thresholds and quotas is objectively sub-optimal by any standard.

And yet now you are saying your numbers are the best possible numbers in the game to be strived for and achieved? And that the only better mitigation attainable would be if you made an error?

I'm drawing a distinction between "best" and "produces lowest DtPS". My numbers are not "gospel" in that they are not guaranteed to be the "best" way to gear your tank, whatever that means. My numbers are the numbers which produce the lowest DtPS though, barring errors in my calculations. I would absolutely welcome corrections to the math if and where there are errors, but the whole definition of my "ideal tank stats" problem space is to reduce DtPS to a minimum. If there is a different set of numbers for the same stat budget which objectively produces lower DtPS for the same damage distribution as my numbers, then something is wrong with my math, because my math specifically seeks out this minimum.

Are my numbers the "best in the game"? No. I don't know how you or your raid group define 'best'. Even I have a hard time defining 'best' where tank gear is concerned. Do my numbers produce the highest mean mitigation possible? Yes.

Ok, then why does this post - http://www.swtor.com/community/showthread.php?t=790085 - by you 3 days ago list to the number the exact same stat differentials as this post - http://www.swtor.com/community/showthread.php?t=792434 - which quotes you from 2013? I fail to see how that is updated.

It's not quoting me from 2013. The author of that post copy/pasted from a web archive of my post that included the original post date. If you look at your own OP, you'll notice that the date shown by the forums is the date and time you originally posted, not the date and time of your last edit.

You also might take the time to notice the change log section in the very next paragraph, which lists Nightmare Dread Fortress, an operation that did not exist in 2013.

As a final note, the web archive used by the author of the post you linked did not have a fully up to date copy of my post. So he used the web archive to grab an old version (it looks like from last fall), and then he swapped out the tables with the ones I re-posted here. This is why the numbers are equal.

Cooldowns notwithstanding.

The game truly does not care which class of tank you bring to a fight. The only thing that matters is the damage and damage types going out versus the mitigation statistics that are trying to counter them. There is no "more out of stacking [any stat] intrinsically" on any tank. The stats you put in give you a raw percentage that is then added with flat percentages in your Discipline or the passives based on that class. The DR is exactly the same across each class.

Defense Chance = 30 * { 1 – [ 1 - ( 0.01 / 0.3 ) ]^[ ( DefenseRating / 60) / 1.2 ) ] }

Shield Chance = 50 * { 1 – [ 1 - ( 0.01 / 0.5 ) ]^[ ( ShieldRating / 60) / 0.78 ] }

Absorb Percentage = 50 * { 1 – [ 1 - ( 0.01 / 0.5 ) ]^[ ( AbsorptionRating / 60 ) / 0.65 ] }

*60 is the dividing factor in the exponent because it is current max level.

Regardless of class plug in your number and you will get the percentage it is contributing.

https://onedrive.live.com/redir?resid=305237C3C432AA!16387&authkey=!AI2-BT9u3wYi9sM&ithint=folder%2c

I did screenshots to show that the values are identical coming off of your raw stat pool. (Shield is the exact same value, Absorb and Defense are off by 2 stat point but you can see the results are the same regardless of class)

Next you have to look at what the classes offer:

Powertech

Discipline: Shield +2%, Dmg Red + 4%, Armor +15%, M/R Def +4%

Cylinder: Armor +60%, Dmg Red +5%, Shield +15%

Active Mitigation: Shield +3%, Absorb +3-28%

Assassin

Discipline: Armor +20%, Dmg Red +4%, M/R Def +6%, Absorb +4%

Stance: Armor +130%, Shield +15%, I/E Dmg Red +10%

Active Mitigation: Shield +15%, Absorb +1-8%, Dmg Red 1-4%

Juggernaut

Discipline: Armor +15%, Shield +4%, I/E Dmg Red – 5%

Stance: Armor +60%, Dmg Red +6%, Shield +15%, Defense +3%

Active Mitigation: Defense +5%, Dmg Red +3%, Absorb +3%, Sonic Barrier

If you have the logs your self or look at someone else's you can find the damage profiles for each fight, and, based on your class's inherent buffs + the stat equations find the best way to get your stats where the need to be. You can do this on a fight-to-fight basis or you can take an average across all fights for a single gear set.

The fact that the stat pool gives the same percentages and the class buffs are flat percentages means that if you find a percentage distribution that works for one tank, attaining the same percent levels on the other 2 can attain the exact same mitigation (to re-iterate: cooldowns notwithstanding). I also find it odd that you state PT's will always take more damage, considering in the screenshots you can see that their passive dmg red buffs are ahead of the Juggernaut in both respects, and ahead of the Assassin in terms of E/K damage.

The reason I go high on shield with PT/Jugg is that at 1200 rating (base in 198's) the Assassin is already at 55.22 without doing anything. So, based on the premise I am trying to get as close as I can to that, but 50% takes a bit much to get to so I stop there and start putting points into other stats. Because my Juggernaut and PT put so much into Shield, their absorption suffers and they end up in the mid-40th percentile. Which is balanced by the fact that they simply take less damage than the Assassin would with the same percentage. Which balances around to Assassin's stacking Absorb (which they have been doing for a very long time). After balancing Shield/Absorb the mean Defense percentages I was achieving with the remaining stat pool was roughly 25%, roughly - I honestly don't know why you are so hung up on that number - after seeing this I balanced it a bit further to make the percentages a bit more exact (i.e. the 25% and 50% respectively), can you really blame me for liking even numbers? Granted, it may not be as *perfectly* mitigating as 25.42% and 49.06%, but we have already touched base on the differences changes that small make.

That was the whole premise of Mean Mitigation. Because I have found that it *does* work (the only true exception to this is the Assassin's inherent +10% I/E damage reduction). The only variance in my damage profiles across my tanks is based on what cooldowns are good in which fights. Which is why I honestly prefer my Juggernaut, as they have at least one cooldown that works against every damage type.

But truly the end point is this: we have both stated that "optimal" and "best" are points of view based on what you are gearing towards. The OP was never meant as a challenge to your math statistics, it was simply as statement of this is how my tanks are geared and it works. The reason I posted is that aside from your math most of the other posts containing specifics on how to gear tanks are very debatable, especially if you read the ones concerning Endurance stacking. SW:toR is a game played by people (gold-spammers don't count) and people will make their own decisions on how to gear regardless of what you are I say. The purpose was to provide a different perspective on how gear can be optimized (and after all we have discussed I use the term loosely).

The end result of what works is always defined by the same thing: progression. If you are downing content, what you have need little changing (if any). If you are not downing content, then you need to look at if the reason is your own fault and seek ways to adjust your stats accordingly (if reasons had nothing to do with mechanical error). As you and I are both downing content in current tier and have NiM achievements from the previous tier I would put forth that neither of us is "wrong", we simply go about doing what we need to get done a different way.

Whether or not people actually use the stat differentials I posted is entirely inconsequential to me, I am simply trying to provide an alternate way of thinking about the stats. The best I am hoping for from this is, no offense to either of us, that people will see that there is not one way to go about doing things, and (even more hopefully) that some of them may even do their own math to find what works best for them instead of just taking what we have stated and following it. Granted the math shows that some things are ridiculous (1k Crit Rating, for example), but within the bounds of "I am not squishy" different tanks are going to have stats that fluctuate based on their play-style.

This is my final response to you personally, and I would like to thank you for the debate we have had. It is rare for me to actually be able to talk about these things this in-depth without people becoming dis-interested. I do hope in the future we may correspond on similarly thought-intensive topics.

If im not mistaken you are trying to get more or less the same % of Def,Shield and Abs in all your tanks.

You consider the passive bonus of each class as less points to spent to get the "standar" d-s-a percents. Right?

The thing is, and as KBN have stated, if we are maximizing gear for minimizing the damage taken, the passive bonus on the tanks is what makes the gear different for each of them.

I think i got what made you think that:

If we consider only the shield and absortion they obviously get better the closer the percents are:

*50% shield and 50% abortion is better DTPS than 75% shield and 25% absortion, even if they are at the same.

This is what made the PT and Assasins try to get the same but with different ratings.

This can generate a cognitive bias: the idea of an standarized optimal stats for the tanks.

But KBN put the mathematical proof of the idea of diferent optimal ratings and thus percents for each tank.

However, if my understanding of english is even worse than I believe please let me know. I want to understand what were you discussing.

Also, KBN, your stats as maximized for the average minimun damage taken per second?(the average table)

Wouldn't it be better to optimize for the lowest of the damage taken in the boss with the biggest damage taken between all the damages taken?

If im not mistaken you are trying to get more or less the same % of Def,Shield and Abs in all your tanks.

You consider the passive bonus of each class as less points to spent to get the "standar" d-s-a percents. Right?

The thing is, and as KBN have stated, if we are maximizing gear for minimizing the damage taken, the passive bonus on the tanks is what makes the gear different for each of them.

More or less, Juggernaut and Powertech have the same percentages as the have the same armor rating and similar Damage Reducation quotients. Assassin's have roughly 10% more Absorb because it evens out the fact they take more base damage (from E/K, they take the least I/E damage of any tank).

I'm not sure the point you are trying to make about "what makes the gear different", as I completely agree that your stat differentials are going to vary based on the Class Bonuses. This is what has my Juggernaut at 1094 Defense Rating while my Assassin is at only 750 - because their passives give them different base percentages.

I think i got what made you think that:

If we consider only the shield and absortion they obviously get better the closer the percents are:

*50% shield and 50% abortion is better DTPS than 75% shield and 25% absortion, even if they are at the same.

This is actually untrue, if you run the damage equations through algorithms that account for DtPS, Hit-to-Hit damage profiles, and even total damage taken over a fight you see that when your Absorb % reaches a certain point you actually get more mitigation out of stacking Shield. It's a balance between how much you are absorbing vs. how often you are actually shielding. To a certain degree it is more beneficial to be shielding more often for less than it is to be shielding for more less often (to a certain degree).

But KBN put the mathematical proof of the idea of diferent optimal ratings and thus percents for each tank.

If you read through everything that we said to each other you will notice multiple times that we both mention that "optimal" is a point of view based on what you are gearing for. He and I go about what we do in a different way but we both accomplish the same goal - staying within average/acceptable DtPS profiles on fights and progressing through content.

I will re-iterate what I said in my final response to him: the point of this post was not "choose my numbers over anyone else's", it was simply a breakdown of how I run my stats and the statement that it works. It also works FOR ME, the purpose was to show a different perspective that can provide similar levels of mitigation but in a different way so that people would (hopefully) discern that there are multiple ways to accomplish the same thing and find what works best for them based on their given class and play-style.

The fact that the stat pool gives the same percentages and the class buffs are flat percentages means that if you find a percentage distribution that works for one tank, attaining the same percent levels on the other 2 can attain the exact same mitigation (to re-iterate: cooldowns notwithstanding)

One of the things I like about this game is the balance between healers and tanks. All 3 of each can equally achieve the end result of clearing the content, but each class goes about it a different way - and I see this as a strength. For healers it is recognised mercs are great spike healers and ops have great HOTs. Because of these differences, you gear each healer classes different to capitalise on their strength (in terms of crit//power/surge/alacrity).

The premise here that you can get each tank to have exactly the same % for D S A doesn't make sense to me for the same reason. Each tank has different strengths and as such should be geared accordingly (i.e. differently to capitilise on these strengths). Juggs live on Def, PTs on Sheild and Sins on Abs (and a touch of Def for good measure). Each tank doesn't need to be the same, rather they excel when their strengths are played, each achieving the same end result by using a very different method to get there.

Just cos a Sin gets 54% rating from inherent abilities, doesn't mean that 54% then becomes the target for Jugg and PT's for the same stat. That logic ignores the fact the classes are different by design and have different strengths that needs to be exploited. Your statement I quote seems to indicate your assumption is that all 3 tanks can be shoved in the same bucket and made to perform equally... well, this may be the case, but it is unlikely to be optimal as you are not bringing each class up to the top, but forcing the other class down to the average. The 3 tanks are inherently different, a strength of this game, don't try to make them the same.

Let me start by quoting the original premise:

Let me preface this by saying this guide is based on an average of mitigation across all 3 tanking classes. Meaning if you add up your armor, stats, and health all 3 classes should have roughly the same DTPS per fight (obvious variances not included), achieved by having similar stat percentages. If this is NOT a style of tanking that you believe is viable you can save your time, you will not agree with anything I am about to say.

Whether it is that you do not believe it is viable or you simply do not like it because it is contrary to your play-style, I did warn that you would not agree with me.

The premise here that you can get each tank to have exactly the same % for D S A doesn't make sense to me for the same reason. Each tank has different strengths and as such should be geared accordingly (i.e. differently to capitilise on these strengths). Juggs live on Def, PTs on Sheild and Sins on Abs (and a touch of Def for good measure). Each tank doesn't need to be the same, rather they excel when their strengths are played, each achieving the same end result by using a very different method to get there.

Starting with the getting each tank to the same % D S A not making sense, I am at a loss as the numbers show it is possible to do. I love the fact that each tank has different strengths, but I seem to see them in a different way than you do. The main point of the premise is with the clarifier of "cooldowns notwithstanding" - THAT is where I love my variety. There are things I can do with my Assassin that I absolutely could not accomplish on the other classes just because their cooldowns are different, same goes for the other 2. This does not mean that I support bringing a different tank to each fight (good God, think of the load time), it simply means I play each fight differently based on which class I am bringing to it.

As far as your mention of healers, I will simply say this: had a friend pre-3.0 that had NOTHING but Crit/Surge on his Operative (with MS Augments obviously). and he successfully when 10/10 NiM. His play-style was incredibly unique and he was one of the spikiest Operative healers I knew, and, even though it did not play to the given "strengths" of the class he made it work, and did very well with it.

That is one of the things I love about this game - especially post-3.0 - you can take any class and role and make it truly your own.

First of all its the players choice how to gear. For some ppl it is enough if it works. I personally however try to strive for perfection. So if the juggernaut tankstats presented here are actually decreasing dtps and spikyness more than KBN's Number it is clear what stats i would go for.

I personally went 1094 def, 1544shield and 1200 Absorb with a kinda split mod setup. I have to admit that bosses that prefer defense over shield/absorb, like Bulo/Master/Calphayus/Lurker in HM, i take a little bit more damage. However Healers feedback is that i am less spiky than i would reach for 1400 defense. Especially at Lurker his hits are Spiky <23k if not shielded> + adds. Increasing shieldchance can help to reduce damage if you dont defend the attack.

Furthermore decreasing dtps is not everything. This has been stated by many progression player. Not only for 3.0 but also for previous content HP had a value. Even though ppl where totally biased on KBN's Numbers and went full mitgation. Progression Tanks did not and where critizised for being HP Bags. Of course they were not, they just followed the approach Milas has suggested in his guide. The guide suggested this for 3.0 especially for fights like Revan Hm, but some tanks already went with extra HP to Brontes NIM and Palace NIM.

A new Theory always come with critizisers but as i have written occasionally in the forum and in my spreadsheet, Shieldchance does not only decrease dtps but also the number of spiky hits, while absorb decreases the damage of spiky hits. Defense however decreases dtps but also increases spikyness. HP also partially decreases the damage of spiky hits but seen in percents. The damage will be the same, but youlll loose 30% of hp not 35 or even 40%. All those Tankstats are there to make your dmg profile "rounder" so that Healers can anticipate incoming dmg better. The problem with defense is that it has the lowest % value. 25% defense would make it impossible for healers to anticipate while Shield 47-50% will not make you eventually take damage like defense does, but it lowers the damage. This might result in a higher dtps but the chance for a "full blow" , meaning a hit neither defended nor shielded occurs less frequently ->making your dmg profile smoother and easier to anticipate.

Its important to avoid eventuallities. Defense is one of those. Stacking defense result in lower dtps but your healers have to be quick if you take 2 or 3 hits in a row. With shield there is a steady incoming dmg, healers might even let your HP fall to 40% before they begin to heal because they can anticipate your mitgation/dmg profile far better than in defense heavy gear.

This however only works for bosses with many M/R+K/E attacks. Bosses who do do mostly F/R damage will favour shield and thus defense becomes even less valuable.

Sidenotes :

Absorb does not only decrease dmg of a spiky hit, but also decreases the dmg of every hit which was shielded. Therefore it also decreases dtps but is dependant of your shieldchance.

Anticipation = The healer know when to heal the tank even without looking on the raidframe.

TTL = Gives the healer more time before it is really important to heal the tank. TTL includes HP/Dtps/Cooldown usage/Selfheal/Spikyness.

Eventualities = A low eventuality means the healers have to heal the tank at the same times during a bossfight. For example after each Heave the Tank needs a hot or 2 + the usual aoe heal to heal the group up after this attack. Furthermore a low Eventuality means healers need to be less flexible. For example in 100 Fights against Boss A the Tank needs healing at 20sec infight, 40 sec infight , 70 sec. infight and so on. So healers can predict when they need to heal. It also gives them the opportunity to heal the raid because they exactly know when they have to stop raidhealing in order to heal the tank.

A high eventuality means a high variance in bossfights. The dmg income on the tank can not be predicted because its always different. So healers become reactive and healing will become more stressfull.

Maintaining a low variance in bossfights is important, even more for progression teams. It is important that players do the same things over and over the same way so the team knows exactly what the other player is doing. Its like learning a poem, repetition. Healers however can not always do it the same way, because dmg profile on the tank is different because the tank defended 3 Hits in a row.

It is important to minimize this eventuality without increasing dtps.

More or less, Juggernaut and Powertech have the same percentages as the have the same armor rating and similar Damage Reducation quotients. Assassin's have roughly 10% more Absorb because it evens out the fact they take more base damage (from E/K, they take the least I/E damage of any tank).

I'm not sure the point you are trying to make about "what makes the gear different", as I completely agree that your stat differentials are going to vary based on the Class Bonuses. This is what has my Juggernaut at 1094 Defense Rating while my Assassin is at only 750 - because their passives give them different base percentages.

The thing is.due to the formulae as higher the rating gets the percent obtained will be smaller.

This doesn't seems to affect the PT and assasins shield and absortion relationship but it does affect the defense and shield+absortion relationship.

If you know a priori that a fight has x amount of defendable hits and y amount of no defendable hits then the amount of defense rating AND defense percents may vary. The reason behind this is that defendable hits can also be shielded. over a certain point one might consider better a point in shield than a point in defense even if every boss hit is defendable.That point is based on ratings and not in percents.

This is actually untrue, if you run the damage equations through algorithms that account for DtPS, Hit-to-Hit damage profiles, and even total damage taken over a fight you see that when your Absorb % reaches a certain point you actually get more mitigation out of stacking Shield. It's a balance between how much you are absorbing vs. how often you are actually shielding. To a certain degree it is more beneficial to be shielding more often for less than it is to be shielding for more less often (to a certain degree).

I don't know what to say, all my calculations showed that. I mean, yes, there is a small difference in the formulaes:

Shield Chance = 50 * (1 – ( 1 - ( 0.01 / 0.5 ) )^( ( ShieldRating / 60) / 0.78 ) )>>>50 (1-0.98^(0.0213675 x))

Absorb Percentage = 50 * ( 1 – ( 1 - ( 0.01 / 0.5 ) )^( ( AbsorptionRating / 60 ) / 0.65 ) )>>>50 (1-0.98^(0.025641 x))

But still: 50*50 >25*75. If we already have 50% shield and the algoritm says 200 more shield rating, most probably its caused by the exponential form of the formulae. And this would reinforce the idea of different final percents and different ratins, not only different ratings.

If you read through everything that we said to each other you will notice multiple times that we both mention that "optimal" is a point of view based on what you are gearing for. He and I go about what we do in a different way but we both accomplish the same goal - staying within average/acceptable DtPS profiles on fights and progressing through content.

I did. i find offensive that you considered that i did not read all. I took a really long time trying to understand the english words then i took more time thinking how i could add something usefull and then i took even more time trying to translate this words in english.

I will re-iterate what I said in my final response to him: the point of this post was not "choose my numbers over anyone else's", it was simply a breakdown of how I run my stats and the statement that it works. It also works FOR ME, the purpose was to show a different perspective that can provide similar levels of mitigation but in a different way so that people would (hopefully) discern that there are multiple ways to accomplish the same thing and find what works best for them based on their given class and play-style.

Yeah i know, your tank stats works well enough for you, but that doesn't mean those stats are the best. That's the problem with mathematics, it applies to everyone and ignores their experiences.

The thing is, the stat budget is so *********** high that unless you really **** up things with defense rating most probably the damage taken between tanks at the same budget will be less than 10%.

For the love of god, most progression healers have time for dpsing in most bosses, most probably they could be able to heal a tank a 10% or even a 20% more in some bosses!.

I was trying to point that out, that your gear is not the best avaible. And i thought that you were trying that, to get the best gear avaible, but if you are not looking for the best or trying to improve your gear or anything, i don't really know what to add.

I tried to point out something, if you are making one and only one gear, try to optimize it for the lowest among the highest damage taken per second at bosses. and that just speaking about DTPS. You could also take your gear just for "not dying during the biggest hits of bosses" thus giving your healers hard time during everything else.

I personally went 1094 def, 1544shield and 1200 Absorb with a kinda split mod setup. I have to admit that bosses that prefer defense over shield/absorb, like Bulo/Master/Calphayus/Lurker in HM, i take a little bit more damage. However Healers feedback is that i am less spiky than i would reach for 1400 defense. Especially at Lurker his hits are Spiky <23k if not shielded> + adds. Increasing shieldchance can help to reduce damage if you dont defend the attack.

Interesting, I may have to drop some of my Shield augments and put them into Absorb and see if I have a difference.

I may not go as low as you have to start, but as I mentioned to someone else, the line of where Shield beats Absorb is a delicate balance to be found.

Also: Completely agree with what you said about Eventuality. My personal view on it is that maximizing your cooldown uptime in those damage windows is one of the keys to decreasing your over-all DtPS in any given fight.

If you know a priori that a fight has x amount of defendable hits and y amount of no defendable hits then the amount of defense rating AND defense percents may vary. The reason behind this is that defendable hits can also be shielded. over a certain point one might consider better a point in shield than a point in defense even if every boss hit is defendable.That point is based on ratings and not in percents.

I completely Agree.

I did. i find offensive that you considered that i did not read all. I took a really long time trying to understand the english words then i took more time thinking how i could add something usefull and then i took even more time trying to translate this words in english.

I am sorry you feel that way. It was not my intent to offend, I was simply using a figure of speech - keeping in mind that other people are also reading the back and forth on this forum and some of them may have not read everything.

I am truly appreciative of the time you spent reading and translating everything, most people on the internet just throw their 2cents in and call it good without understanding the topic beforehand. It means a lot that you spent the time and then responded in a manner and with information that I do have to think about and process.

Yeah i know, your tank stats works well enough for you, but that doesn't mean those stats are the best.

I never said my stats were "best." All if have stated as that they are different and achieve similar results to a system that is labeled "Ideal Tank Stats." The point was to get people thinking, to offer a new point of view and allow them to have another, viable alternative instead of having only one place to turn. My ULTIMATE goal was to show that within the confines of the game there are different ways to achieve the same numbers (ask DPS and Heals, their gear varies dramatically but they can still pull the same numbers in fight/on dummy if they do it correctly), and by so doing have them not follow any of the sets they find online, but rather use them as a reference and adjust to find what works best for them.

UPDATE:

After all the discussions that have been had on this forum I simply had to play around with my gear and run the operations to see how damage profiles change.

The current configuration I am running is this (noticed a slight DtPS decrease actually, special thanks to justinplainview and Cidgarrillo for giving me different perspectives to consider).

All values consider Split-Mod configuration and all I actually did was play with my augments.

Juggernaut: 4 Shield Augments became 4 Absorb

Defense 1094 = 25.08%

Shield 1512 = 47.97%

Absorb 1289 = 47.36%

Powertech: 6 Defense Augment became 6 Absorb

Defense 1094 - 21.08%

Shield 1616 - 50.11%

Absorb 1185 - 49.94%

Assassin: 1 Shield Augment rest Absorb

Defense 750 - 24.93%

Shield 1252 - 55.88%

Absorb 1947 - 55.76%

I would also like to apologize for the slight in accuracies of the %'s in the OP. That was done with gear I had on and manipulating stats with Adrenals and Relics, so it was incredibly imprecise.

The actual equations for what you will get out of a stat pool are:

30 * { 1 – [ 1 - ( 0.01 / 0.3 ) ]^[ ( DefenseRating / Level) / 1.2 ) ] } + Class Bonuses = Defense Chance

50 * { 1 – [ 1 - ( 0.01 / 0.5 ) ]^[ ( ShieldRating / Level) / 0.78 ] } + Class Bonuses = Shield Chance

50 * { 1 – [ 1 - ( 0.01 / 0.5 ) ]^[ ( AbsorbRating / Level ) / 0.65 ] } + Class Bonuses = Absorb Percentage

where the values of Class Bonuses are defined as:

Assassin - Defense = 16, Shield = 35, Absorb = 24

Juggernaut - Defense = 13, Shield = 24, Absorb = 23

Powertech - Defense = 9, Shield = 25, Absorb = 27

**Class Bonus values are calculated including the +5% Shield and +20% Absorb contained in your offhand and accounting for Active Mitigation stats that one <!SHOULD!> have 100% uptime on**

This is just something I have been playing around with in the formulas (I have a lot of time for math in-between patients):

- If you accept the premise of Mean Mitigation across all tanks you may wish to try this -

Based on the fact that most PT's run low Defense I wished to see what you could get with similar stats on Assassin's and Juggernauts, this is what I found.

Assassin (B-Mods, so health is at 57,478)

Shield 1200 = 55.22% (Base Rating)

Absorb – 2456 = 59.99% (All B-Mods, Enhancements, Augments, both Implants, and Ear)

Defense – 185 = 18.5% (Just Stim/Relics - LOWEST YOU CAN POSSIBLY GO)

**Again, as per Mean Mitigation Theorem, Assassin Absorb % should be 10% higher than PT/Jugg due to Lt Armor

Going off of this and trying to match to Defense % on the other 2 while keeping Shield/Absorb relatively even I was able to make this:

Juggernaut (B-Mods, so health is at 55,166.5)

Shield – 1824 = 51.25 (12Augs)

Absorb – 1580 = 50.94 (2 Augs + Implants + All B-Mods + 6 Enh)

Defense – 437 = 18.58 (Ear+Relics+Stim+1Enh)

Powertech (B-Mods, so health is at 55,166.5)

Shield – 1720 = 51.2 (10 Augments)

Absorb – 1297 = 51.46 (4 Augments + 8 B-Mods + Ear + Implants)

Defense – 824 = 18.65 (Relics + Stim + All Enh + 1 B-Mod)

I may try this out at some point just because the differentials still look solid, and factoring in that most of the defensive cooldown in the game either buff Defense or work against the attacks that can be defended anyway. Also interested to see how it works considering the B-Mod health pools would definitely help in I/E damage fights.

If you do try this before I get around to it I would love to here how your experiences with it went.

I was curious so I ran KBN's numbers through the formulas and compared them to my own.

Now before anyone gets up in arms about this: I AM NOT SAYING MY NUMBERS ARE BETTER THAN HIS, I AM ALSO NOT SAYING ONE SHOULD CHOOSE MINE OVER HIS. I AM A STRONG ADVOCATE OF DO YOU OWN MATH, THIS IS JUST FOR COMPARISON.

Juggernaut (KBN) [assumes full mitigation set-up, stat pool of 4003, so I ran his 4000-block numbers]

Defense: 1544 = 28.5%

Shield: 1208 = 44.32%

Absorb: 1248 = 46.81%

Juggernaut (Mean/Mitigation) [stat pool of 4003]

Defense: 1094 = 25.08% (-3.42%)

Shield: 1564 = 48.55% (+4.23%)

Absorb: 1345 = 48.09% (+1.28%)

Total % Difference = +2.09%

Juggernaut (Mean/Split-Mod) [stat pool of 3895 (-108 stat)]

Defense: 1094 = 25.08% (-3.42%)

Shield: 1512 = 47.97% (+3.65%)

Absorb: 1289 = 47.36% (+0.55%)

Total % Difference = +0.78%

Juggernaut (Mean/B-Mod) [stat pool of 3841 (-162 stat)]

Defense: 1094 = 25.08% (-3.42%)

Shield: 1512 = 47.97% (+3.65%)

Absorb: 1235 = 46.63% (-0.73)

Total % Difference = -0.5%

Assassin (KBN) [assumes full mitigation set-up, stat pool of 4003, so I ran his 4000-block numbers]

Defense: 875 = 26.13%

Shield: 1484 = 58.65%

Absorb: 1641 = 52.63%

Assassin (Mean/Mitigation) [stat pool of 4003]

Defense: 750 = 24.93% (-1.2%)

Shield: 1304 = 56.52% (-2.13%)

Absorb: 1949 = 55.78% (+3.15%)

Total % Difference = -0.18%

Assassin (Mean/Split-Mod) [stat pool of 3949 (-54 stat)]

Defense: 750 = 24.93% (-1.2%)

Shield: 1252 = 55.88% (-2.77%)

Absorb: 1947 = 55.76% (+3.13)

Total % Difference = -0.84%

Assassin (Mean/B-Mod) [stat pool of 3859]

Defense: 750 = 24.93% (-1.2%)

Shield: 1200 = 55.22% (-3.43%)

Absorb: 1909 = 55.4% (+2.77%)

Total % Difference = -1.86%

Powertech (KBN) [assumes full mitigation set-up, stat pool of 4003, so I ran his 4000-block numbers]

Defense: 593 = 16.31%

Shield: 1896 = 51.94%

Absorb: 1511 = 50.14%

Powertech (Mean/Mitigation) [stat pool of 4003]

Defense: 1094 = 21.08% (+4.77%)

Shield: 1616 = 50.11% (-1.83%)

Absorb: 1293 = 51.41% (+1.27%)

Total % Difference = +4.21%

Powertech (Mean/Split-Mod) [stat pool of 3895 (-108 stat)]

Defense: 1094 = 21.08% (+4.77%)

Shield: 1616 = 50.11% (-1.83%)

Absorb: 1185 = 49.94% (-0.2%)

Total % Difference = +2.74%

Powertech (Mean/B-Mod) [stat pool of 3841 (-162 stat)]

Defense: 1094 = 21.08% (+4.77%)

Shield: 1564 = 49.55% (-2.39%)

Absorb: 1183 = 49.91% (-0.23%)

Total % Difference = +2.15%

**Stat percentages include Active Mitigation that one <!SHOULD!> have 100% uptime on**

Juggernaut (KBN) [assumes full mitigation set-up, stat pool of 4003, so I ran his 4000-block numbers]

Defense: 1544 = 28.5%

Shield: 1208 = 44.32%

Absorb: 1248 = 46.81%

 

Juggernaut (Mean/Mitigation) [stat pool of 4003]

Defense: 1094 = 25.08% (-3.42%)

Shield: 1564 = 48.55% (+4.23%)

Absorb: 1345 = 48.09% (+1.28%)

Total % Difference = +2.09%

I'll address this one specifically, since it is representative of the entire comparison. First off, here are the damage ratios I'm going to assume for the sake of this comparison (note that the actual HMs have higher F/T+I/E, but the relative M/R vs F/T ratios are close enough for this discussion):

• M/R+K/E = 73.1878%
  
• F/T+K/E = 19.6532%
  
• F/T+I/E = 7.19721%
  

For 4003 exactly, my stat distribution shows: {defense -> 1545, shield -> 1209, absorb -> 1249}. Overall, this generates the following stochastic values, which is to say including all debuffs, all bonuses, all boss penalties, and all active mitigation:

• DR = 49.7030%
  
• Defense = 42.3005%
  
• Shield = 44.3305%
  
• Absorb = 46.8194%
  
• Resist = 5%
  
• Internal Resist = 24%
  
• Heal Bonus = 1%
  

In order to net this into total survivability, we have to consider the following equation:

1 - (mrke*(1 - dr)(1 - defense)(1 - shield*absorb) + ftke(1 - dr)(1 - resist)(1 - shield*absorb) + ftie(1 - iresist)(1 - resist)) / (1 + healbonus)

Given the above, this generates a mean survivability of 73.2723% for a Guardian with my stat distribution.

Let's look at yours… With your stat distribution, and again including all stochastic bonuses, I get the following:

• DR = 49.7030%
  
• Defense = 39.1777%
  
• Shield = 48.5460%
  
• Absorb = 48.0895%
  
• Resist = 5%
  
• Internal Resist = 24%
  
• Heal Bonus = 1%
  

Again, plugging those numbers into the same equation, we get a total mean survivability of 73.1733%, which is 0.135% lower than the stat distributions I generated. Completely irrelevant difference in a boss fight, but still a difference and in the negative direction.

I'm relatively certain the reason for this disparity in our calculations is that you are not fully taking into account all of the boss penalties, buffs, debuffs and bonuses associated with the Guardian class. For example, does your math take into account the fact that most M/R boss damage has sub-100% accuracy? (this is above and beyond the accuracy debuff that tanks apply; most boss attacks simply have an accuracy penalty, similar to a player's basic attack) Are you taking into account the accuracy debuff? The force/tech damage debuff? Are you assuming debuffs from other tanks? If you could generate stochastic mitigation values, similar to what I give above, that would help with a more direct comparison.

For 4003 exactly, my stat distribution shows: {defense -> 1545, shield -> 1209, absorb -> 1249}. Overall, this generates the following stochastic values, which is to say including all debuffs, all bonuses, all boss penalties, and all active mitigation:

 

• DR = 49.7030%
  
• Defense = 42.3005%
  
• Shield = 44.3305%
  
• Absorb = 46.8194%
  
• Resist = 5%
  
• Internal Resist = 24%
  
• Heal Bonus = 1%
  

Interesting enough: you used the word "stochastic" which means - 'randomly determined; having a random probability distribution or pattern that may be analyzed statistically but may not be predicted precisely.'

Yet you listed values that were precise to 4 decimal places.

Also, you mention that your tank stats make you 0.135% more survivable, but I think we will both agree survival in a boss fight is not a % chance, it is a yes or no question - did you or did you not die?

And the one thing that I won't agree with you on is your damage profiles, you can say with a certainty that a certain % of the attacks thrown out in a fight are M/R, E/K, or I/E; however each and every one of those attacks will have a roll to determine if it actually hits you followed by another roll to determine if it is a Critical or not. Making the total % of what type of damage goes out unpredictable. The attack types/%'s can be identical for 2 fights but the damage profiles will always vary. If you believe you can calculate mitigation to predict survivability that accurately in every fight, you need to have a long talk with RNGesus.

I'm relatively certain the reason for this disparity in our calculations is that you are not fully taking into account all of the boss penalties, buffs, debuffs and bonuses associated with the Guardian class. For example, does your math take into account the fact that most M/R boss damage has sub-100% accuracy? (this is above and beyond the accuracy debuff that tanks apply; most boss attacks simply have an accuracy penalty, similar to a player's basic attack) Are you taking into account the accuracy debuff? The force/tech damage debuff? Are you assuming debuffs from other tanks? If you could generate stochastic mitigation values, similar to what I give above, that would help with a more direct comparison.

As far as the disparity on our math I will tell you this much: mine assumes 100% mitigation for all of a boss's given "big hits".

Lets take Walkers for an example, under the premise that we are using the no-swap method and I am on Walker 1.

For every single Mega Blast there is a Sonic Barrier. And for every single window where Walker 2 switches to me there is a cooldown (i.e. Saber Reflect - Saber Ward - Saber Reflect - Invincible - Repeat). If the situation really hits the fan I still have Enraged Defense and Endure Pain for healing emergencies.

I am unsure if you take this into account for your calculations, but my stat differentials are focused on mitigating the rest of the multiple, smaller hits in the fight as the big ones are already accounted for.

Interesting enough: you used the word "stochastic" which means - 'randomly determined; having a random probability distribution or pattern that may be analyzed statistically but may not be predicted precisely.'

Yet you listed values that were precise to 4 decimal places.

You're welcome to round if you would like. Note that statistical analysis over stochastic processes does not imply "decimals are deceptive". It just means that there will be an uncertainty bound.

Also, you mention that your tank stats make you 0.135% more survivable, but I think we will both agree survival in a boss fight is not a % chance, it is a yes or no question - did you or did you not die?

By that standard, increasing mitigation is pointless unless it can guarantee survival 100% of the time.

Mitigation is not about just getting to the end of the fight. It's about how much load you put on your healers. It's about how well you bias the dice in hard phases. It's about how deep your margins for error are. Having 0.135% less mitigation certainly isn't a lot, but saying that it's irrelevant because death is binary is missing the point of mitigation.

And the one thing that I won't agree with you on is your damage profiles, you can say with a certainty that a certain % of the attacks thrown out in a fight are M/R, E/K, or I/E; however each and every one of those attacks will have a roll to determine if it actually hits you followed by another roll to determine if it is a Critical or not.

First off, bosses have 0% critical chance.

Second, damage profiles are always considered pre-mitigation. If you look at post-mitigation damage profiles, you end up double-counting effective mitigation (e.g. defense, in your example). Taking things pre-mitigation means that the only RNG-related uncertainty in the values (aside from random mechanics, which aren't the bulk of tank damage) comes out of the boss attack damage roll, which is not a significant source of uncertainty. (boss damage rolls are usually within a tighter bound than player damage rolls) Thus, pre-mitigation damage profiles are extremely precise, and they certainly are not affected by defense/resist in any way.

The attack types/%'s can be identical for 2 fights but the damage profiles will always vary. If you believe you can calculate mitigation to predict survivability that accurately in every fight, you need to have a long talk with RNGesus.

Not the point. The point is to figure out what sort of mitigation is best in each fight.

As far as the disparity on our math I will tell you this much: mine assumes 100% mitigation for all of a boss's given "big hits".

 

Lets take Walkers for an example, under the premise that we are using the no-swap method and I am on Walker 1.

 

For every single Mega Blast there is a Sonic Barrier. And for every single window where Walker 2 switches to me there is a cooldown (i.e. Saber Reflect - Saber Ward - Saber Reflect - Invincible - Repeat). If the situation really hits the fan I still have Enraged Defense and Endure Pain for healing emergencies.

Pro tip: Sonic Barrier mitigates about 2k damage. Mega Blast hits for about 13k. Sonic Barrier is just part of your active mitigation; it's not a magic effect that removes a mechanic, as you imply.

Cooldowns are going to be applied at high damage phases of the fight regardless of mitigation. All cooldowns except Saber Reflect compound with the effects of mitigation, meaning that better mitigation means higher value out of your defensive cooldowns. All this is to say that defensive cooldowns are not interesting when considering mitigation optimization, outside of situations where you have an absurdly infrequent attack which is ALWAYS eaten by a defensive cooldown and unaffected by other mitigation (e.g. using Shroud on Kel'sara's Force Leech).

I am unsure if you take this into account for your calculations, but my stat differentials are focused on mitigating the rest of the multiple, smaller hits in the fight as the big ones are already accounted for.

That's a reasonable approach to mitigation, though I strongly disagree about the reason it is reasonable. However, you will find almost universally that, if you remove the infrequent big hits from a boss fight, the damage ratios skew absurdly towards melee/ranged attacks (since most of the big, infrequent hits are force/tech). In other words, if all you care about are the numerous small attacks in a boss fight, you will end up with mitigation which biases very heavily towards defense, which is not what is shown in the OP.

You honestly have no idea how hard I am laughing right now. Because at the end of the day it has nothing to do with your viewpoint or my viewpoint. Both of our DtPS profiles are nearly identical on all fights. Our progression is also on the same level. The point of tanking is to manage agro and positioning in a fight, while staying alive. Gear is a factor yes, but many of the factors that determine whether or not you live have absolutely nothing to do with you. Teams are made of 8 or 16 player, and at the NiM level it requires all of them to be doing there job correctly to pass. If you as a tank are off on positioning - fail. If the dps do not have the numbers to beat the timer - fail. If the healers cannot counter-act the damage going out - fail. Also, you have to factor in what the other players are doing, if your other tank is a Jugg/PT their AoE taunt is going to increase mitigation, if you have a Marauder who is Predation-happy, also going to increase mitigation, if you have Sorcerer who is adept at Static Barrier timing, again increase in mitigation. If you have healers who know how to pre-cast before a big hit where their heals hit you immediately after damage - the EHPS just went up, if your dps are ballers that are on top of their game the fight as a whole is going to be shorter which makes everything easier from healing to DtPS of the raid. Tanking is meant to be done in pairs, because at the HM/NiM level 1 person is not meant to take all of the damage. If you have a co-tank that knows when to swap (on fights that do not have a built-in swap mechanic) it will also change the amount of damage you take. Also: when I run my PT I almost NEVER use Oil Slick for myself, I use it as a defensive cooldown for the OTHER tank, which will change his DtPS numbers. There are so many factors rolling during a fight that unless your algorithm can account for all 8 or 16 people, their rotations, and their positioning during a fight, your "Ideal Tank Stats" are in the same category as Mean Mitigation - just a theory.

Don't try so hard to have people make a stat budget and then adjust their playstyle accordingly, let people play the way they know how and find the stats that work best for them. You run your numbers and they work for you, they also work for some other people. However, other people (myself included), did not have as much success with your numbers as they don't quite fit other playstyles. Heals and DPS is the same way, find your groove and get the stats that help you accomplish what needs to be done the way that you are doing it. There is no "Ideal" in the game, it isn't built that way. The point of progression raiding is to work as a team to down an objective, if the objective is being downed - who cares? If you are failing, then you need to go look at the parses and find out what was going wrong, whether it be heals, damage, or tanking that was messing up. I challenge you to ask every tank in the game that is at least 8/10 HM and see how many of them DON'T run either of our stat differentials. Guarantee you most of them started with a model they found somewhere (more than likely yours) and then adjusted the stats to what worked for them.

Lastly - it's a video game. Meant to be fun? The concept of enjoyment. Granted, at the world progression level (#Zorz) there is an amount of sincerity required with how you approach fights, but I can say with most certainty that people on that level also have fun while pushing content, and themselves, while understanding that attaining top-level adeptness has very little to do with gear and deals mostly with knowledge of the class, it's abilities, and how to apply them to the situations that arise in the fights.

---To reiterate once more: Don't match your playstyle to a set of stats, find stats that fit your playstyle. This is Sevrahn, signing off from the tank forums (for now). See you in-game----

Furthermore decreasing dtps is not everything. This has been stated by many progression player. Not only for 3.0 but also for previous content HP had a value. Even though ppl where totally biased on KBN's Numbers and went full mitgation. Progression Tanks did not and where critizised for being HP Bags. Of course they were not, they just followed the approach Milas has suggested in his guide. The guide suggested this for 3.0 especially for fights like Revan Hm, but some tanks already went with extra HP to Brontes NIM and Palace NIM.

 

Could have used you in 2.0 man. I was a "HP bag"...worked great for me haha. If I raid in 3.0, I'll probably do a similar set up.

what started as a back and forth on damage profiles and gear theory has turned into a mathematica drive by shooting

On the forums, it's KBN's way or get out lol. Is what it is, I appreciate all the work in the thread.

On the forums, it's KBN's way or get out lol. Is what it is, I appreciate all the work in the thread.

to be entirely fair, KBN's way is still better then any other way.. yeah, the difference is not really measurable (~.135%) but it's still higher, and easier to look at.

While I can understand the thought process behind the 'gear the way it feels' at the end of the day, everything is based on numbers, and numbers really can't lie, so while things may 'feel' different in different gear levels, its all anecdotal evidence, as the numbers tell the real story.

On the forums, it's KBN's way or get out lol. Is what it is, I appreciate all the work in the thread.

As always, I'm very open to alternative approaches. I just want to see rational and objective justifications for these approaches, or at the very least objective specification of what these approaches are. This is precisely what I was trying to elicit with my replies. In short, I want the answer to the question of "why".

Sometimes you need to take a step back and look at something with a fresh perspective...

to be entirely fair, KBN's way is still better then any other way.. yeah, the difference is not really measurable (~.135%) but it's still higher, and easier to look at.

 

While I can understand the thought process behind the 'gear the way it feels' at the end of the day, everything is based on numbers, and numbers really can't lie, so while things may 'feel' different in different gear levels, its all anecdotal evidence, as the numbers tell the real story.

There never has and never will be one "best" way to gear a tank. There are numerous strategies to cope with damage and perform your role as a tank. If you define a very specific damage coping strategy and intake profile, then sure you can then identify the optimal gear set for that condition, but it won't be the winner for another one. So, it's a matter of definition and play style choice.

Trying to be all religious and say one flavor of tank gearing is best is like trying to convince the world dogs are better than cats. Both are great pets and have pros/cons, they both have a role and your efforts are ultimately in vain if trying to rank them and force the issue on others.

Is "best" reducing the maximum amount of damage taken possible regardless of gearing impact? Great, go full mitigation as dictated by a specific damage profile of MR/ET and/or FT/EK.

Is "best" surviving the long amount of time possible without heals? Great, go full survivability itemization as dictated by a specific profile of MR/ET, FT/EK, FT/IE.

It's generally (1) pick the coping strategy you prefer (cats and dogs); (2) define the damage profile you will be encountering; (3) gear the optimum performing set for that scenario. Changing anything in the first two points will impact what would be optimal. As a silly quick example, you can't come up with a set designed for max mitigation against a 100% MR/ET profile and say it's the "best" as it certainly won't be bet for 100% FT/EK. You can only apply the "best" label with the caveat that it is for a very specific play style flavor and damage profile, it's by no means "best" overall.

Ideally all we/I hope to achieve in these forum discussions and online tools that some of us work on is identifying options so *YOU* can decide what's best. Ultimately your conditions and play styles will vary, and that's awesome. Cookie cutter solutions to help people shoot for something that's "good" (note I didn't use "best") is great and all, just don't get too caught up in trying to define a "best" overall set as this concept is mostly a myth for us tanks.